Virginia Senate Bill SB798

Virginia 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 12/2/22
• Refer: 12/2/22
• Report Pass: 1/13/23
• Engrossed: 1/17/23
• Refer: 2/9/23
• Report Pass: 2/14/23
• Enrolled: 2/23/23
• Chaptered: 3/22/23
• Passed: 3/22/23

Caption

Individuals with disabilities; terminology.

Impact

If enacted, SB798 would require various state laws and regulations to update the language used to describe individuals with disabilities. This change is expected to enhance the recognition of the rights of individuals with disabilities, ensuring that language across state policies is consistent with current understandings of disability. By changing the terminology, the bill seeks to eliminate stigmatizing language and foster an environment that promotes inclusivity and equality for all residents, particularly those with disabilities.

Summary

SB798 proposes changes to the terminology used in state law regarding individuals with disabilities. The bill aims to replace outdated and potentially offensive terms with more respectful and inclusive language. Supporters of the bill argue that adopting modern terminology is crucial for promoting dignity and respect for individuals with disabilities, reflecting evolving societal views on disability rights and inclusion. The legislative discussions surrounding this bill generally emphasize the importance of ensuring individuals with disabilities are recognized and treated with respect in legal contexts.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB798 is predominantly positive among advocates for disability rights, who see it as a necessary step towards greater acceptance and equality. During the discussions, there were strong endorsements from various advocacy groups that emphasize the importance of language in shaping societal attitudes toward individuals with disabilities. Some concerns were raised about the pace of implementation and the need for widespread education on new terminology, though these apprehensions were minor compared to the general support for the bill's objectives.

Contention

Despite the overall support for the bill, there were some points of contention regarding the implementation timeline and the resources necessary to ensure that all state agencies and officials are equipped to adopt the new language. Opponents of the bill primarily raised concerns about the potential costs associated with updating documents, training for state employees, and the challenges involved in enforcing these changes uniformly across different sectors. However, proponents argue that the social and moral imperatives for promoting inclusive language far outweigh these logistical issues.